4 ms·

Its a $30K car with a range of 190 miles and can charge itself 40 miles a day in optimal conditions. I live in southern california and I drive about 20 miles a

Its a $30K car with a range of 190 miles and can charge itself 40 miles a day in optimal conditions. I live in southern california and I drive about 20 miles a day under normal conditions. Today I have solar panels on my house and a plug-in electric car, but I think the value proposition of a $30K car that I never need to plug in or refuel (during normal conditions) is pretty compelling. The solar panels on my home can spend time offsetting the rest of my lifestyle

dougmwne 4y ago
Outside of the geeky cool factor, what precisely is the value proposition? You say you have solar on your house. So is it that you don't have to remember to plug in? Is that a big deal for most people? What if there was some kind of auto-connect when you pulled into your parking spot? Would that be better than carrying around solar panels that don't point at the sun? I read through the absolute technical limits of solar cars once and promptly crossed the idea off in my head. Might as well just have 1000w of folding panels in your trunk that you can set out if you really need off grid charging.
- cwkoss 4y ago
  Most renters have little control of whether they have access to an EV hookup. This opens up the market to street parkers in the right climates.
  - dougmwne 4y ago
    I suppose I could imagine a scenario where maybe a city dweller who doesn't drive much could street park and they could do their grocery runs and occasional running around from the solar self-charge. Then you would be looking at less trips to the public charger. It's probably pretty common in Manhattan to do less than 10 miles a day so you'd only end up at the public charger when the weather was bad. Ok I'm sold on that scenario.
    - cwkoss 4y ago
      I think it could make even more sense in places like Arizona: fewer clouds, trees, and tall buildings. Kind of interesting to ponder that we might soon have car SKUs that are much more regionally localized: a car that works great in CA or AZ, but is entirely impractical for the midwest. (However, I suppose that describes 'convertibles' pretty well)
- porphyra 4y ago
  Well electricity in the Bay Area costs about $0.50 per kWh (or $0.25 per kWh at night using the ev2-a plan, though it makes everything else more expensive). Having a car that can gradually recharge itself over the day can actually save hundreds of dollars per month (my last bill was like $600), without having to deal with the hassle of installing rooftop solar and having to pay extra money just for having solar installed [1]. https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/11/04/california-set-to-release-anti-rooftop-solar-net-metering-plan/ https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/11/04/california-set-to-rel...
  - dougmwne 4y ago
    Right but what's the problem with plugging into the solar panels that stay in place?
    - porphyra 4y ago
      1. you can charge at work 2. having solar panels that stay in place might cost money per month, as per the link in my last comment
    - Schroedingersat 4y ago
      Renters aren't allowed to put the stationary ones up.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  Technical limits change. The marketing is kinda dishonest (picking perfect conditions during high latitude mid summer), but 10-20mi/day is achievable in many areas/times. The main value proposition I see is an urban renter or someone with only outdoor parking (who also drives less than a suburbanite) only needing to seek out a charger once a month (or maybe not at all during summer). It also lowers grid load from this demographic that would otherwise charge over short durations by 30-80%.
michaelt 4y ago
EEVblog has an informative video on this topic [1] looking at the 'Lightyear Zero' solar car (not the Sion Sono Motors this article is about) The presenter is in Sydney, he's got a large roof-mounted solar array - 8kw peak output, and about 8x the area of the cells on the car. And he still struggles to cover a 25-30km daily commute with solar, achieving it only 80-90% of the time. And good luck parking your car somewhere that gets more sun than a rooftop installation in Sydney :) However, the Sion's $25,000 price tag is a lot better than the Lightyear Zero's $250,000 price, so they've got that going for them. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIokNnjuam8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIokNnjuam8
Grim-444 4y ago
"can charge itself 40 miles a day in optimal conditions." <- I believe this is the "basic math" that you were asked to run. Using random numbers from Google for a Tesla 3 for an example, it has a 50kWh battery and 305 miles of range. That's 164Wh per mile. 40 miles would require 6,560Wh. Assuming you leave the car in perfect sunlight for a full 8 hours every day, and there's no cloud, and you get 100% sunlight for the entire 8 hours, then you'd need enough panels to produce 6560Wh / 8hr or 820W. I could probably barely fit 300W-400W worth of panels on top of my vehicle, and that's with covering the hood, trunk, roof, everything. So even in the MOST IDEAL possible scenario, where you have your car in perfect sunlight for 8 hours a day, you're not even half way to producing 40 miles per day.
- ttfkam 4y ago
  Your error was in presuming the same weight and drag coefficient as the Tesla. The Aptera is both much lighter and has a far lower drag coefficient. That's where the extra range comes from despite the relative lack of surface area.
  - ranguna 4y ago
    Do you have a wh/km to backup your claim?
  - l1tany11 4y ago
    The apteta isn’t the subject of this article though. The aptera is legally not even a car, as it’s a 3 wheeler. It’s a pretty extreme vehicle. Very cool, but quite extreme. The subject of the article, is trying to be a normal 5 door car. So comparing it to the state of the art in normal cars makes sense. The claims with this car are aptera performance (40 miles a day) but with normal car form. How is that possible? That’s why people are suspicious.
- Schroedingersat 4y ago
  The aptera has 750W of solar panels, so you're pretty close. It also has about 40% less Cd, half the frontal area, much less powerful motors nd a fraction of the weight. Which is how you get from 8 hours of sunlight to 5. Real world it's probbably more like 20-30mi The most likely reason it won't become common is it's legally a motorcycle to get the weight down to something sensible (or has no legal category in some areas) because cars are a regulatory captured nightmare and we're literally not even allowed to have a sane sized vehicle. The lightyear and sion are much closer to vaporware and their marketing departments are doing the concept a great disservice, but they have over a kW of panels and you could reasonably expect them to be mostly self charging if your commute is short or it's just for errands.
rasz 4y ago
>Its a $30K car with a range of 190 miles and can charge itself 40 miles a day in optimal conditions. "investors with poor understanding of technology". You didnt even bother to read the article. Its actually: _ “ideal conditions”; that comes out to 10 to 20 miles per day, which is near negligible _
FitBoy 4y ago
[dead]

dougmwne 4y ago

Outside of the geeky cool factor, what precisely is the value proposition? You say you have solar on your house. So is it that you don't have to remember to plug in? Is that a big deal for most people? What if there was some kind of auto-connect when you pulled into your parking spot? Would that be better than carrying around solar panels that don't point at the sun? I read through the absolute technical limits of solar cars once and promptly crossed the idea off in my head. Might as well just have 1000w of folding panels in your trunk that you can set out if you really need off grid charging.

cwkoss 4y ago
Most renters have little control of whether they have access to an EV hookup. This opens up the market to street parkers in the right climates.
- dougmwne 4y ago
  I suppose I could imagine a scenario where maybe a city dweller who doesn't drive much could street park and they could do their grocery runs and occasional running around from the solar self-charge. Then you would be looking at less trips to the public charger. It's probably pretty common in Manhattan to do less than 10 miles a day so you'd only end up at the public charger when the weather was bad. Ok I'm sold on that scenario.
  - cwkoss 4y ago
    I think it could make even more sense in places like Arizona: fewer clouds, trees, and tall buildings. Kind of interesting to ponder that we might soon have car SKUs that are much more regionally localized: a car that works great in CA or AZ, but is entirely impractical for the midwest. (However, I suppose that describes 'convertibles' pretty well)
porphyra 4y ago
Well electricity in the Bay Area costs about $0.50 per kWh (or $0.25 per kWh at night using the ev2-a plan, though it makes everything else more expensive). Having a car that can gradually recharge itself over the day can actually save hundreds of dollars per month (my last bill was like $600), without having to deal with the hassle of installing rooftop solar and having to pay extra money just for having solar installed [1]. https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/11/04/california-set-to-release-anti-rooftop-solar-net-metering-plan/ https://pv-magazine-usa.com/2022/11/04/california-set-to-rel...
- dougmwne 4y ago
  Right but what's the problem with plugging into the solar panels that stay in place?
  - porphyra 4y ago
    1. you can charge at work 2. having solar panels that stay in place might cost money per month, as per the link in my last comment
  - Schroedingersat 4y ago
    Renters aren't allowed to put the stationary ones up.
Schroedingersat 4y ago
Technical limits change. The marketing is kinda dishonest (picking perfect conditions during high latitude mid summer), but 10-20mi/day is achievable in many areas/times. The main value proposition I see is an urban renter or someone with only outdoor parking (who also drives less than a suburbanite) only needing to seek out a charger once a month (or maybe not at all during summer). It also lowers grid load from this demographic that would otherwise charge over short durations by 30-80%.

michaelt 4y ago

EEVblog has an informative video on this topic [1] looking at the 'Lightyear Zero' solar car (not the Sion Sono Motors this article is about) The presenter is in Sydney, he's got a large roof-mounted solar array - 8kw peak output, and about 8x the area of the cells on the car. And he still struggles to cover a 25-30km daily commute with solar, achieving it only 80-90% of the time. And good luck parking your car somewhere that gets more sun than a rooftop installation in Sydney :) However, the Sion's $25,000 price tag is a lot better than the Lightyear Zero's $250,000 price, so they've got that going for them. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIokNnjuam8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xIokNnjuam8

Grim-444 4y ago

"can charge itself 40 miles a day in optimal conditions." <- I believe this is the "basic math" that you were asked to run. Using random numbers from Google for a Tesla 3 for an example, it has a 50kWh battery and 305 miles of range. That's 164Wh per mile. 40 miles would require 6,560Wh. Assuming you leave the car in perfect sunlight for a full 8 hours every day, and there's no cloud, and you get 100% sunlight for the entire 8 hours, then you'd need enough panels to produce 6560Wh / 8hr or 820W. I could probably barely fit 300W-400W worth of panels on top of my vehicle, and that's with covering the hood, trunk, roof, everything. So even in the MOST IDEAL possible scenario, where you have your car in perfect sunlight for 8 hours a day, you're not even half way to producing 40 miles per day.

ttfkam 4y ago
Your error was in presuming the same weight and drag coefficient as the Tesla. The Aptera is both much lighter and has a far lower drag coefficient. That's where the extra range comes from despite the relative lack of surface area.
- ranguna 4y ago
  Do you have a wh/km to backup your claim?
- l1tany11 4y ago
  The apteta isn’t the subject of this article though. The aptera is legally not even a car, as it’s a 3 wheeler. It’s a pretty extreme vehicle. Very cool, but quite extreme. The subject of the article, is trying to be a normal 5 door car. So comparing it to the state of the art in normal cars makes sense. The claims with this car are aptera performance (40 miles a day) but with normal car form. How is that possible? That’s why people are suspicious.
Schroedingersat 4y ago
The aptera has 750W of solar panels, so you're pretty close. It also has about 40% less Cd, half the frontal area, much less powerful motors nd a fraction of the weight. Which is how you get from 8 hours of sunlight to 5. Real world it's probbably more like 20-30mi The most likely reason it won't become common is it's legally a motorcycle to get the weight down to something sensible (or has no legal category in some areas) because cars are a regulatory captured nightmare and we're literally not even allowed to have a sane sized vehicle. The lightyear and sion are much closer to vaporware and their marketing departments are doing the concept a great disservice, but they have over a kW of panels and you could reasonably expect them to be mostly self charging if your commute is short or it's just for errands.

rasz 4y ago

>Its a $30K car with a range of 190 miles and can charge itself 40 miles a day in optimal conditions. "investors with poor understanding of technology". You didnt even bother to read the article. Its actually: _ “ideal conditions”; that comes out to 10 to 20 miles per day, which is near negligible _

FitBoy 4y ago

[dead]